--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 154 SCANNERS Ref: E1500005 Date: 01/02/97 From: AL MCCLAIN Time: 03:58pm \/To: ALL (Read 12 times) Subj: 2006 Scanner What's the going rate for a Pro 2006 with cell unblocked? AL * SLMR 2.1a * Always fill your canteen upstream of the herd. - JetMail v1.148 - Unregistered QWK Mail Door for Spitfire --- FreeMail 1.10 alpha-3 * Origin: -= N I G H T L I N E =- Home Of GameNet '95 (1:115/815) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 154 SCANNERS Ref: E1500006 Date: 01/05/97 From: TODD BUTLER Time: 05:13am \/To: NATHAN BOLLINGER (Read 10 times) Subj: Scrambling Nathan Bollinger was caught stating: NB> I bought my wife an AT&T Model 9100 900mhz cordless phone. (content shortened for brevity) NB> This phone is said to have "Digital Voice Scrambling" NB> and when I tried to tune to these freqs on my scanner, NB> I couldn't even detect a carrier! It makes me wonder, NB> if such an "anti-eavesdropping" technology is so NB> inexpensive that it can be incorporated into a consumer NB> product, then why aren't there more law enforcement NB> agencies using it? They haven't been convinced by the local representative of the land-mobile communication industry giants to make the switch to newer technology. NB> Granted, I'd hate to see ANYTHING on a radio frequency NB> get scrambled, but with all the folks in governemt NB> whining about scanner listeners, it seems like they could NB> very easily eliminate the hobby. PLEASE DO NOT GIVE THE GOVERNMENT ANY NEW IDEAS. Typically the only agencies utilizing this technology have something to hide from the public they serve. Over 99% of the radio transmissions have no need to be PRIVATE or HIDDEN. If the law enforcement community scrambles routine radio traffic, they are sending you a message: THEY ARE HIDING SOMETHING! If the community which you reside has hearings regarding the anticipation of expending your tax dollars to fund studies or conversion of existing equipment make sure your voice is heard, clear and UNSCRAMBLED in a public forum. Do not allow the PUBLIC to be denied open access to law enforcement action. If you give up the right to monitor, you give up the right to react to abuse of the judicial system. I'm not advocating that you become a source of a problem, DO NOT INTERFERE with the proper operation of the agency, monitor their activity to become an "informed" citizen. * SLMR 2.1a * The trouble with apathy is that no one really cares! --- MsgToss 2.0d(beta) 02/21/93 * Origin: HAM>link< RBBS 612/HAM-0000 Saint Paul, MN [K0TG] (1:282/100) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 154 SCANNERS Ref: E1500007 Date: 01/04/97 From: SCOTT CHRISTENSEN Time: 04:05pm \/To: BRUCE CLARK (Read 9 times) Subj: Re: Happenings Bruce Clark writes in a message to Scott Christensen BC> Not to mention, only a few miles of atmosphere to attenuate BC> the signal. Atmosphere is usually a negligable loss factor at less than 1 GHz. What *are* problems are trees, buildings, multiple reflections, very heavy precipitation and of course, natural obstructions. You can get odd atmospheric conditions where signal ducting will happen, but this phenomonon takes energy that is normally radiated off the planet and returns it to the planet's surface where it can be received at distances greater than normal. --- COUNTERPoint 2.3 * Origin: MacRefuge * 612-426-6687 * (1:282/24@fidonet) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 154 SCANNERS Ref: E1500008 Date: 01/04/97 From: MARC CHABOT Time: 07:01pm \/To: STEVE WALFORD (Read 9 times) Subj: Heres a UK guy Hi Steve. >Been taking this area for about a month now, it mainly appears to >be from the states, where their laws on the use of scanners >appear a lot more liberal than here in the UK. More liberal?!? If you walk in the streets with your scanner, are the bobbies running to you with their clubs? What are the restrictions in England? >What scanner have you got ? Pro43, Pro2032 and Pro2022. MC Canada --- * SPEED 2.00 #2668 * --- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12 * Origin: STAT! Medical BBS - (514) 279-5145 HST/V.34 - (1:167/100.0) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 154 SCANNERS Ref: E1A00000 Date: 01/05/97 From: BILL FUNK Time: 06:22pm \/To: CHARLIE BUSHELL (Read 9 times) Subj: CORDLESSPHONES On 1 Jan 97 03:24pm, Nathan Bollinger wrote to Charlie Bushell: CB>> I think there is some confusion on this matter.. CB>>Cordless Phones: Legal to recieve- Illegal to divulge CB>>Cellular Phones: Illegal to recieve - Illegal to divulge Wrong: cordless phones are now illegal to monitor. CB>> CB>> Insofar as any "radio communications" other than "public CB>>broadcasting", It CB>>is illegal to discuss what you have heard with any third party. This CB>>applies CB>>from everything from Ham radio to private companies or for that CB>>matter, CB>>anything "not intended" for "the general public". Wrong: Ham radio transmissions are explicitly not protected at all. CB>> A cordless phone is considered to be a "two way radio device" and it CB>>is not CB>>regulated in the same manner as a cellular phone. It is Illegal to CB>>"listen" to CB>>cellular phones;in addition, it is Illegal to have a device capable of CB>>doing CB>>so. Wrong on two counts: it's illegal to monitor cordless phones. It is *not* illegal to own a scanner capable of monitoring cellular calls. CB>>Scanners, for example, must be manufactured in a manner as not to CB>>recieve CB>>cellphones. Because of thier short and limited range, Cordless phones CB>>, have CB>>not been regulated in this manner and are considered to be radio CB>>equipment,whereas, cellular phones are considered to be a private CB>>telephone CB>>by law, and are regulated by local government and telecommunication CB>>agencies. CB>> CB>>I hope this clears up any misconceptions that may exist. CB>> CB>>Charles Bushell I hope my corrections cleared up some confusion you seem to have. You guys gotta keep up! Bill Funk: Internet: skypilot@starlink.com ASCIi User Group: http://www.starlink.com:80/~ascii ... This Tag line is Stolen. --- Via Silver Xpress V4.00 SW12853 * Origin: Inn on The Park (tm) Scottsdale, AZ (602)947-3896 (1:114/237) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 154 SCANNERS Ref: E1A00001 Date: 01/05/97 From: BILL FUNK Time: 06:22pm \/To: ANDREW LEARY (Read 9 times) Subj: RE: . On 3 Jan 97 10:52pm, Andrew Leary wrote to Kerry Kowalski: KK>> What I can't figure is: it's not legal cordless or cell phones. KK>> The scanners nolonger have 869-896 or the input freqs. Why do KK>> they still have 43-47 mhz in new scanners??? Go figure... AL> Because cordless phones are a very small portion of that band. Many AL> other services (which are legal to monitor) are in the same band, AL> including police, ambulances, school buses, fire, etc. Actually, it's because congress hasn't told the FCC to implement rules to block scanners that will operate on (tune to) cordless phone freqs, like it did with cell phones. Bill Funk: Internet: skypilot@starlink.com ASCIi User Group: http://www.starlink.com:80/~ascii ... How long do you think it would take to cook Barney? --- Via Silver Xpress V4.00 SW12853 * Origin: Inn on The Park (tm) Scottsdale, AZ (602)947-3896 (1:114/237) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 154 SCANNERS Ref: E1A00002 Date: 01/05/97 From: BILL FUNK Time: 06:22pm \/To: MATT SMITH (Read 9 times) Subj: ILLEGAL RADIOS IN RUSSIA On 4 Jan 97 07:38pm, Matt Smith wrote to Roland Stiner: ... RS>> America does not produce scanners, they're imported like all RS>> electronic RS>> things. None are being imported since the ban. MS> Just like in Russia, owning a radio receiver is illegal. Really? Then who do all those domestic Russian radio stations transmit to? (Or, for those to whom correct English is a matter of life and/or death, "To whom do all those domestic Russian radio stations transmit?" ;-)) Bill Funk: Internet: skypilot@starlink.com ASCIi User Group: http://www.starlink.com:80/~ascii ... There are few problems that can't be solved by high explosives. --- Via Silver Xpress V4.00 SW12853 * Origin: Inn on The Park (tm) Scottsdale, AZ (602)947-3896 (1:114/237) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 154 SCANNERS Ref: E1A00003 Date: 01/05/97 From: ROLAND STINER Time: 05:36pm \/To: MATT SMITH (Read 9 times) Subj: Re: ILLEGAL SCANNERS MS> Just like in Russia, owning a radio receiver is illegal. It is not illegal to own them here, it's just that we don't make any in this country. --- OLX 1.53 PRIVATE REPLIES? TO E-MAIL ADDRESS: NK2U@JUNO.COM --- PCBoard (R) v15.22 (OS/2) 10 * Origin: CyberNet BBS Lyndhurst, NJ (1:2604/151) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 154 SCANNERS Ref: E1A00004 Date: 01/04/97 From: JIM LAWRENCE Time: 05:43pm \/To: ALL (Read 9 times) Subj: Milair Logs - 1/4/97 Some loggings from northern Vermont USA: 238.25 - Several Vermont ANG F-16s working in Yankee. One aircraft, initially started off using the call sign Oz 2, changed to Maple 92 for the RTB flight. First time I've heard something like that in a while. Vermont ANG was also up working several freqs in the 138s. If you live near a unit of the Air National Guard, I strongly suggest you search thru the 138-142 MHz range, concentrating on 138 and 141 especially. This is a great way to hear tactical comms even if your scanner doesn't have the 225-400 MHz milair band. Mode = AM. 295.80 - Unided aircraft engaged in AR activities in AR-631. 139.875 - USAF tankers from McGuire AFB NJ engaged in RTB chit-chat. If you live anywhere in New England or the northeastern U.S., keep this one in your scanner for all types of AR-related comms. 257.50 - Inbound flight working Brunswick NAS Maine ops. Inquiring about food and fuel. 255.40 - Burlington Vermont FSS with various weather reports. --- Maximus 2.02 * Origin: BVT Connection Barre,VT (802)-479-2159 2.5 Gig & 7+ CD's (1:325/604) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 154 SCANNERS Ref: E1A00005 Date: 01/04/97 From: SCOTT HOFFMAN Time: 10:34am \/To: BUD JAMISON (Read 9 times) Subj: Re: . SH> First off, its NOT illegalt to manufacture scanner thats receive ellular! BJ> BJ> Yes, it IS. It's also illegal to sell scanners designed to be able to moni BJ> cellular. The fact that some radios and TVs can monitor cellular because o BJ> IMAGE freqs does not make those units illegal. BJ> BJ> Law Enforcement does NOT get warrants that would allow them to use scanners BJ> monitor cellular, since they would have NO control over what units they hea BJ> The warrants are VERY specific as to who they can monitor, and they go to BJ> source to do it. Regarding your first comment.. Perhaps their is a discrepance between the words "test equipment" and "scanner", but irregardless I hate to tell you but these scanner companies "DO" undisputedly sell scanners capable of cellular reception. There is no doubt about that and all you have to do is either read ICOMS catalog or call ICOM and they will tell you that ceartain models are reserved for government useage (those being the full coverage models with no blocking). The government is above the law my friend, you seem to forget that. The law is NOT written for the government to follow, it only applies to the people (in this specific case). Their exists almost no law on the books which restricts any piece of electronic equipment which the government can use.. these restrictions are for ordinary citizens. Secondly, as for intercepting of cellular, yes they can go to "the source" with a warrant.. but perhaps you have never heard of a cellular phone interception system which is sold widely to law enforcement. The unit does NOT randomly monitor any call on a channel, but only targets one specific user (hopefully under warrant) by tracking the call as it is handed off from channel to channel. Secondly, how do you think the cellula companies are allowed to own the equipment they do also.. because it is deemed "test equipment" and because it is exemp. How do you think every company that sells "spectrum analyzers" which can demodulate cellular can sell their stuff, because it is exempt under the clause of "test equipment" (although its questionable as to whether you would call a spectrum analyzer a "scanning receiver". --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: Brian's World (516)-331-5540 Long Island, NY (1:2619/232)